The official TrainerRoad thread

rdt

Supermurph09 wrote:

Are you talking about skipping the low volume part?

No. Each of the TR SSB plans, ie. Low, Mid & High volume, comprises two parts/blocks: I & II, each part/block lasting 6 weeks, giving an overall 12 week SSB duration.

See on them on this TR page:
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/plans/base

and the accompanying text:
"Sweet Spot Base has two consecutive six-week blocks: I and II. Time permitting, complete each block in order."


The part I -> part II is a progression, so people would 'normally' do both as part of a progressive base phase. Obviously, you can change things up and do whatever suits you, eg. maybe you're already carrying a load of base work or being riding MBs etc, so choose to skip Part I. I only mentioned it as some new TR users don't realise the Part I/II 'recommended' approach so may end up just doing one of the SSB parts then jump to Build. I did the same myself last year. The TR web page could probably be clearer so maybe TR will change it...

bobmcstuff

Just finishing up SSB1 myself, it's the rest/recovery week next week then I'll be into SSB2.

I'm doing the low volume and then adding a bit extra in, plus some running. Should be in decent form by the end of SSB2. The low volume one is basically the same but misses the low intensity midweek ride and only has one 90 minute weekend workout. Suits me fine as I try to do the club ride at the weekend so doing 2 90 minute workouts wouldn't really work.

Part 1 is almost all sweetspot work, then part 2 has quite a bit of VO2 as well so it brings your form up quite fast (if you're like me, VO2 intervals are probably the fastest way of getting the power up).

supermurph09

rdt wrote:

Supermurph09 wrote:

Are you talking about skipping the low volume part?

No. Each of the TR SSB plans, ie. Low, Mid & High volume, comprises two parts/blocks: I & II, each part/block lasting 6 weeks, giving an overall 12 week SSB duration.

See on them on this TR page:
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/plans/base

and the accompanying text:
"Sweet Spot Base has two consecutive six-week blocks: I and II. Time permitting, complete each block in order."


The part I -> part II is a progression, so people would 'normally' do both as part of a progressive base phase. Obviously, you can change things up and do whatever suits you, eg. maybe you're already carrying a load of base work or being riding MBs etc, so choose to skip Part I. I only mentioned it as some new TR users don't realise the Part I/II 'recommended' approach so may end up just doing one of the SSB parts then jump to Build. I did the same myself last year. The TR web page could probably be clearer so maybe TR will change it...

You were right to mention this as I feel like I’m pretty clued up but didn’t realise. Pretty sure many others won’t either.

bobmcstuff

If you've got a reasonable base already you should be alright without doing SSB1. If not, the amount of harder intervals might be a bit tough.

But you should see some good improvements, I will be interested to see how you got on.

I completed the last hard workout of SSB1 today (Palisade) and I was able to bump up the intensity by 3% for the last 2 intervals, so I am reasonably confident that my next FTP test will show some improvements (in the calendar for the 12th!).

daniel_b

bobmcstuff wrote:

If you've got a reasonable base already you should be alright without doing SSB1. If not, the amount of harder intervals might be a bit tough.

But you should see some good improvements, I will be interested to see how you got on.

I completed the last hard workout of SSB1 today (Palisade) and I was able to bump up the intensity by 3% for the last 2 intervals, so I am reasonably confident that my next FTP test will show some improvements (in the calendar for the 12th!).

I was fairly sure I had a decent enough base, and to kickstart things when I was feeling demotivated, carried out an 8 week HIT maintenance plan over November\December and just in to January - from there went straight into Low volume SSB II, and it's been challenging, but fine - looking forward to completing this in 2 weeks, and then am planning to go into a low volume build program, with some actual outdoor riding added in too, totalling at 4 rides per week.

Open to the idea of changing that approach though if anyone more knowledgable than me wishes to comment.

bobmcstuff

That approach sounds fine to me - I always do the low volume version and add stuff in.

Not sure I am more knowledgeable than you though

If you look at the differences between the low and mid volumes it's mainly an extra easy ride in the week and an extra 90 minute harder one at the weekend. You can always add in an easier ride in the week to the low volume and I would be subbing one of those 90 minute weekend ones for an outdoor ride anyway - 90 minutes on the turbo Saturday and Sunday sounds a bit bleak to me (unless the weather is really bad!).

For example I've ridden 7hrs this week made up of 3.5 off the TR plan and a 90k ride yesterday.

supermurph09

Latest update, going well, feel like I'm bouncing back nicely. On current FTP I probably turned SS in THR but I think I'm already back to a higher FTP so the power was more likely nearer actual SS.

https://hitthesweetspot.home.blog/2019/ ... tit-clark/

bobmcstuff

262 W yesterday from 242 W 3rd Jan (8.3% increase). Very happy with that given I had about 4hrs sleep the night before and I felt rubbish. My PB is only 263!

Also lost 4.3kg since 3rd Jan. Which only gives 3.6 W/kg, but I think I have another 3kg I can lose at least without affecting anything. 4 W/kg should be achievable I think, and in not too long.

Getting stuck into SSB2 now.

supermurph09

Another update: http://hitthesweetspot.home.blog/2019/02/13/bluebell/

Into week 3 of SSB mid vol 2.

daniel_b

Afternoon all,

completed the last two 'gentle' workouts of low volume SSB II at lunchtime today.

Does anyone else do this with their easy weeks?

For a while when on the easier rides, I tend to spend a lot of time in the drops, and last night for an hour ride, I did that, also knocked my cadence up by 5 rpm from my usual figure, and lastly did it with no fans on. So although effort was low in comparison, as I had no air flow, I had to work pretty hard, and sweated a fair bit - I still made sure I was well hydrated.

Today I decided to crack out the other one (Hoping to FTP early doors on Thursday) and tried to do the same, but after 42 minutes I was struggling -temp was some 16C in there, versus 5C last night, so put the pedestal fan in swing mode for the last 20 minutes or so, but only on low - allowed me to complete it, though was not able to sustain the higher cadence for the whole of it - also spent it solidly in the drops.

Is this a good idea, bad idea, neither here nor there?

bobmcstuff

The cadence and time in the drops - sure, makes some sense. Not really sure why you would make yourself sweat out though, unless you were looking for heat adaptation?

I can't really see how it helps.

daniel_b

bobmcstuff wrote:

The cadence and time in the drops - sure, makes some sense. Not really sure why you would make yourself sweat out though, unless you were looking for heat adaptation?

I can't really see how it helps.

My thinking was simply that it made it harder work than it would have been with cooling assistance.

Something I suppose you could experience on a climb in hot conditions abroad.

bobmcstuff

Daniel B wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

The cadence and time in the drops - sure, makes some sense. Not really sure why you would make yourself sweat out though, unless you were looking for heat adaptation?

I can't really see how it helps.

My thinking was simply that it made it harder work than it would have been with cooling assistance.

Something I suppose you could experience on a climb in hot conditions abroad.

Well, it's supposed to be a recovery ride, so it is supposed to be easy, it should be active recovery - if it was a lot harder it might not really be a recovery ride any more. I doubt it makes a lot of difference to anything though, unless you're making it so hard it's no longer recovery. Just seems like sweaty misery for limited benefit

Heat adaptation is a temporary effect (apparently) so it only really makes sense to target that if you are about to go and do a load of hot climbs abroad.

Personally I don't like those recovery rides, I find them really boring. I often to sub out for one of the Baxter variants, especially for the 90 minute weekend one because I prefer more frequent tempo changes (IF and TSS are about the same, and it's the same zones).

daniel_b

Yep good point and well made!

I too find them fairly boring, but brighten them up by watching cycle racing, herald sun tour, first 3 stage highlights today.
Also the fact I know it's kind of a mini taper to get you in the right place for the ftp test keeps me focussed.

Just had a look at the Baxter variants, really like that style of workout with the frequent step changes, will likely swap a couple out on the next plan, thanks for the tip

Bonus with the longer 14+ minute intervals is that it sits quite well with me if I'm looking to get into a rhythym down in the drops.

daniel_b

Thanks again BobMc, just did one of the Baxter variants (Upped it by 10% to get the IF in the region of where I wanted it) whilst watching Paris-Nice, and it was way more engaging as you rightly asserted - spent just over the hour in the drops too.
Probably going to stick in a 90 variant for tomorrow morning as well - so a HUGE thankyou mate for pointing that out 8)

Struggling a bit at the mo, as was due to be on my wind down week before another FTP test, but picked up a b1tch of a cold last Monday, and still struggling to shift it - but don't want to lose fitness, so have been trying to keep myself ticking over.
Also meant to have my first TT on Saturday, still going to do it I think, but unlikely to be at full capacity.
If I had been, I was planning to use it to try and calculate my FTP, ie the last 20 minutes worth of effort - it's only a 10 (but rolling), so expecting it to take me in the region of 27 minutes - it's a non aero\tt bike TT.

shazzz

Has anyone had a problem recently with the PC app interfering with the PC's wifi connection? For the last ten days or so whenever I launch Trainerroad on my laptop the laptop's wifi stops working! Wifi reconnects when I close the Trainerroad app.
Ta

daniel_b

shazzz wrote:

Has anyone had a problem recently with the PC app interfering with the PC's wifi connection? For the last ten days or so whenever I launch Trainerroad on my laptop the laptop's wifi stops working! Wifi reconnects when I close the Trainerroad app.
Ta

No issues for me here - just using Windows 7, with a wifi extender, but not a cabled connection if that makes sense.
Could be worth logging a ticket with TR?

shazzz

Thanks, may be something wrong with my laptop although I’m on windows 10 rather than 7.
I have logged it with TR support. Hopefully they’ll have some ideas. I may try uninstalling and starting with a fresh install over the weekend.

shazzz

shazzz wrote:

Has anyone had a problem recently with the PC app interfering with the PC's wifi connection? For the last ten days or so whenever I launch Trainerroad on my laptop the laptop's wifi stops working! Wifi reconnects when I close the Trainerroad app.
Ta

In case anyone encounters the same problem, the guys at TR came back to me pretty quickly and were very helpful. Turns out it is a problem with Bluetooth - if I disable BT on my laptop when using TR then the wifi continues uninterrupted. Not a problem for me as my devices are all ANT.

I do use BT headphones sometimes which I now can't do while streaming and using TR. The suggestion to fix that is to do a fresh install. I haven't tried this yet as it isn't much of a problem for me at the moment.

daniel_b

Bizarre, a fresh install of what - the OS?

That would be a pain for me, as I use a bluetooth speaker - the laptop speaker is not up to the job of being heard above the fans otherwise!

shazzz

Fresh install of Trainerroad was the suggestion.
I'm now using an old TV connected to laptop and blasting the sounds out of the TV speakers, so not a problem until the neighbours complain!

paul64

My apologies if this is in the sub-forum somewhere and I haven't uncovered it yet.

For those new to a DD (in my case many years on mechanical fluid trainer and thinking about jumping in later in the year) is there some basic guidance on options hooking up a large TV? I have a room I can use with a 40" TV and would like to simulate rides such as well known climbs rather than join in races. Amidst terms like Zwift, Sufferfest, casting etc. I haven't worked out which software I would need on which possible trainers avoiding on paying for things I don't need.

super_davo

Apple TV is the obvious choice. Will run Zwift and a host of others.

I can't be doing with anything by Apple, so I use an Android TV box. That's more limited in terms of software in can run though. Can run Trainerroad and Rouvy, but not much else.

I now have a Ryzen 5 laptop hooked to the TV using an HDMI cable, which opens up a whole host of other software options including Zwift and the fab and free (for now) RGT.

Other options are to cast / airplay your phone over to the TV, but in my experience that lags a bit and doesn't give the best picture.

paul64

Thanks for the feedback. I no longer use a laptop so if I say that I have a desktop directly connected to the router and TV has a wireless connection to the router does that open the options a bit? I probably need to find a guide to learn more.

daniel_b

I had another not very positive experience with the ramp test on Friday, that's 5 attempts, only effort 3 went properly.

I just run out of puff and hr too quickly, and can't sustain it to give me a true picture.

So I'm going back to the twin 8 running in resistance mode, at a certain percentage resistance, in a given gear - information tests to be run close to the time I need to take it.

Shame, as the ramp test is less of a strain overall, and nice and quick, so easy to cram in.

My test on Friday put me at 233, but I felt like I was around 240 or higher, so set it to that, and completed a 0.95 IF workout today, and ys it was hard but I completed it at the full IF, so I'm pleased that has backed up my ascertions.

super_davo

paul64 wrote:

Thanks for the feedback. I no longer use a laptop so if I say that I have a desktop directly connected to the router and TV has a wireless connection to the router does that open the options a bit? I probably need to find a guide to learn more.

There are ways you can send a PC video feed wirelessly e.g. HDMI sender/receivers, but I wouldn't recommend it for this use case. You'll connect the trainer to the PC using Bluetooth or Ant+ both of which have quite short ranges so the device really needs to be in the same room as the trainer.

My advice would be to move the base unit of your PC in to the same room, hook it up to the TV with an HDMI cable and live with the ball ache of moving back and forth for the short term. Work out what software you like and then take a decision as to the device you need permanently once you've tried out a few. Which will no doubt be an Apple TV...

And get yourself an Ant+ USB dongle, which I find gives a much better connection than Bluetooth and would work on any device you buy.

bobmcstuff

Daniel B wrote:

I had another not very positive experience with the ramp test on Friday, that's 5 attempts, only effort 3 went properly.

I just run out of puff and hr too quickly, and can't sustain it to give me a true picture.

So I'm going back to the twin 8 running in resistance mode, at a certain percentage resistance, in a given gear - information tests to be run close to the time I need to take it.

Shame, as the ramp test is less of a strain overall, and nice and quick, so easy to cram in.

My test on Friday put me at 233, but I felt like I was around 240 or higher, so set it to that, and completed a 0.95 IF workout today, and ys it was hard but I completed it at the full IF, so I'm pleased that has backed up my ascertions.

The ramp test uses a large number of samples to correlate people's ramp test results with FTP. This will naturally form a normal distribution - Looks like you are just to one side of the mean...

If you are consistently reading ~3% (233 vs 240) too low from the ramp test there is no problem correcting for that, you can still take advantage of the reduced strain and time demands. It's only if it gives inconsistent results that it becomes a problem.

daniel_b

bobmcstuff wrote:

Daniel B wrote:

I had another not very positive experience with the ramp test on Friday, that's 5 attempts, only effort 3 went properly.

I just run out of puff and hr too quickly, and can't sustain it to give me a true picture.

So I'm going back to the twin 8 running in resistance mode, at a certain percentage resistance, in a given gear - information tests to be run close to the time I need to take it.

Shame, as the ramp test is less of a strain overall, and nice and quick, so easy to cram in.

My test on Friday put me at 233, but I felt like I was around 240 or higher, so set it to that, and completed a 0.95 IF workout today, and ys it was hard but I completed it at the full IF, so I'm pleased that has backed up my ascertions.

The ramp test uses a large number of samples to correlate people's ramp test results with FTP. This will naturally form a normal distribution - Looks like you are just to one side of the mean...

If you are consistently reading ~3% (233 vs 240) too low from the ramp test there is no problem correcting for that, you can still take advantage of the reduced strain and time demands. It's only if it gives inconsistent results that it becomes a problem.

Yes indeed you make a very good point there - first time I carried it out, I upped it by 5%, can't recall what I did second time - 3rd time it felt like I maxed it out, so stuck with the figure, but the last two times I have upped it by 3-4% each time, so I think you are right, in that I am just going to have to go with feel, and increase it between 0-5%, and based on my previous workouts leading up to it, make a semi-educated surmisation - if that is indeed a word.

The only minorly frustrating bit is that I won't know my true ftp, as it will pretty much always be my own estimate, unless the stars align and I happen to ace it\have a really good day, but I suppose that should be pretty obvious, as I'll exceed my current ftp by a few %.

An if I up it by a few percent, and then crash and burn on the next few workouts, then I may have hit my own ceiling, or need a bit of time off.

I'm clawing my way back towards 4w\kg :?

bobmcstuff

Any test is only a snapshot at that specific moment in time/day/temperature/last nights sleep/caffeine intake anyway, it will be a bit variable. I dont think it's worth getting too hung up on it... so long as you can reliably produce a sensible number which allows you to complete the training plans I dont think it matters too much.

If you've been doing it a while you are probably able to pretty accurately guess your FTP anyway, I know I can (last time I tested within 5 watts of what I had estimated, which makes the whole thing seem a lot less attractive in future!). Although getting a nice new high FTP test is quite motivating I suppose.

courtmed

anyone got a free trial code for TR I could have? I have been enjoying Zwift but I've read too many, well-researched, criticisms of their plans to put my faith in them so I'm planning to move to TR, assuming a free trial goes well